Car Corrections (updated 18th December 2018)

Comments

And man I'm not here to argue with you.I also apologize if you or any US player felt offended by my posts but I want game to be accurate how it should be.GTR is great of the line with **** MRA...Corvette have great MRA and It's like should be but grip for 29 RQ car is one of the lowest IG and it isn't right

And man I'm not here to argue with you.I also apologize if you or any US player felt offended by my posts but I want game to be accurate how it should be.GTR is great of the line with **** MRA...Corvette have great MRA and It's like should be but grip for 29 RQ car is one of the lowest IG and it isn't right

@Huskic69If that's the case, then tons of others big-engined, high-powered heavy cars' MRA should be revised too, e.g. the XLR-V

does it seem kinda off that a car that has the same as a freaking zonda has midrange of a honda?

Not really, considering lots of Hondas in game actually have decent MRA. Not godly, but decent. It's a Japanese car, you don't expect godly MRA from it, except the Furai, of course. (Hutch gave the Furai negative MRA for some reason.)

A better comparison should be "The freaking Zonda 760RS having the MRA of a Camaro Convertible"

@Huskic69If that's the case, then tons of others big-engined, high-powered heavy cars' MRA should be revised too, e.g. the XLR-V

does it seem kinda off that a car that has the same as a freaking zonda has midrange of a honda?

Not really, considering lots of Hondas in game actually have decent MRA. Not godly, but decent. It's a Japanese car, you don't expect godly MRA from it, except the Furai, of course. (Hutch gave the Furai negative MRA for some reason.)

A better comparison should be "The freaking Zonda 760RS having the MRA of a Camaro Convertible"

@Huskic69 Considering that I'm not a car nerd that reads car books every single day... And that I don't have a car nor a driver's license... Yes I don't know much about cars, if you would like to think it that way.

And this thread is for car corrections, can we stop discussing about this off topic thingy and start posting something that is about the corrections?

E10 Mazda RX-7 (1985) - We can go two ways with this. The image and MY for the car is pointing at the 1985 Japanese-Spec Savanna RX-7 GT. But the power figures however, points at the 1987 European-Spec RX-7.

So the specs for the 2006 RX-8 Revolution High Power were used as there is no official claims for the PZ. So the stats wouldn't be fully accurate, but at least it's more accurate than what we have now.

C15 Mazda RX-7 Turbo (1985) - Change name to "Mazda RX-7 Turbo II" (was "Mazda RX-7 Turbo"); Model year to 1989 (was 1985). Reference: https://i.imgur.com/vzkfP7Z.png (The car in the image proved to be the later "Turbo II" model with the side badging)

I don't have the official manufacturer claims for this car aswell, but Automobile Catalog reckons it can do 0-60 in 4.8 seconds. Coincidentally, Top Speed website also have the Spirit R's 0-60 with 4.8 seconds. Reference: https://www.topspeed.com/cars/mazda-rx7/ke344.html

The CX-5 does not require any changes. They are using the North American model. The 2018 CX-5 GX comes with the gasoline engine and front wheel drive. As well, the 2017.5 and the 2018 are virtually the same so the image is fine. Here is a link - https://www.mazda.ca/en/vehicles/cx-5/overview/

As a side note - Automobile-Catalog is a great reference for dimension specifications, but shouldn't be used for performance data. The site creates estimations of performance based on a formula. From the site:

"The simulation of all cars
accelerations and performance in road conditions is based on
ProfessCars™ software and detailed technical parameters of each
individual mode"

Not sure of tyre change. But certainly it should be one of the fastest 1/4 mile cars ig Imo. So the fastest (irl) is copo camaro followed by chiron then idk if super sport or demon or 918 or 720s. Maybe p1 as well. Dunno where the pp will stand.